If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

The World of Biased, and Corrupt Judges

08-06-2004, 04:53 PM

The Court Orders they send out have false assertions in them, lies and
seek to dismiss cases rather then hear them.

Federal Judges Suffering Amnesia
J.A.I.L. News Journal
__________________________________________________ ___
Los Angeles,
California**************************************** *September*18,
2003
*
Federal Judges Suffering Amnesia
More and more in our complicated world of investment businesses, federal
judges are having to apologize when caught in conflicts of interest,
with the words, "Sorry, I just didn't remember that I owned corporate
stock in that company*which is litigating before me." This conflict of
interest is becoming so common place that*they generally argue
the*same defense, i.e., they just didn't know.
*
What's more is that none of these judges suffer any punishment for their
clear violations of*law. In other words, the message is established,
"Ignorance by judges is an irrefutable*defense." But with everyone
else, ignorance*is no excuse!*Just ask*those that were at the top
executive positions of Enron,*and*other corporate scandals wherein
ignorance was claimed.
*
Just imagine a system if all*thieves had to do at worse when*caught
was*return what*they stole.*Yet, this is clearly the standard set
for federal judges*caught engaging in deciding cases in which they own
stock.
*
This conflict is becoming so common-place, it would imply that every
federal judge should*ethically post outside his courtroom a complete
and true list of everything of which the judge owns so anyone with a
case in his court could see before entering court*if the judges
had*a conflict of interest. However, when such issues are
raised*on*this point, there has been*every blockage raised from
federal judges claiming privacy from having to*reveal their holdings.
Just try to probe into the holdings of any federal judge in which you
have a case, and see how far you get. The only way you can find out is
if it becomes a matter of open publicity.
*
Who in their wildest imagination could ever attempt to justify such a
unaccountable system*as that enjoyed by*federal judges. But this is
the benefits granted federal judges for serving as the
protective*alligators in the mote that surrounds the Executive and
Legislative Castle. As hand-in-glove, they*must each protect*one
another, clearly establishing the need for judicial accountability
offered by J.A.I.L.* - Ron Branson
*
New York Daily Newshttp://www.nydailynews.com
Fed judges in stocks
By GREG B. SMITH
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
Monday, September 15th, 2003
In July 1997, Manhattan Federal Judge Milton Pollack awarded $29 million
to Chase Manhattan Bank in a routine contract dispute, the kind that
shows up in courts every day. The case was ordinary - the ruling was
anything but.
*
At the time, Pollack and his family owned up to $300,000 worth of stock
in the beneficiary of his ruling: Chase. Even after Pollack said he
realized he owned Chase stock, records show he then sold it for a gain
of $50,000 to $100,000 - and stayed on the case anyway.
Last week, an appeals court vacated Pollack's award, calling the veteran
judge's conflict "an abuse of discretion" and ordering that a different
Manhattan federal judge take the case.
But Pollack is not the only judge whose stock holdings raise
conflict-of-interest questions. The Daily News found several other New
York federal judges who owned stock in companies involved in lawsuits in
their courts.
Strictly prohibited
With a rise in the number of New York-based shareholder suits since the
1990s Wall Street bubble burst, such judicial conflicts - which the law
strictly prohibits - have become increasingly difficult to avoid,
experts say. "I can't understand why any judge sitting in New York would
own stock in any company likely to litigate in New York," said lawyer
Daniel Levitt, who successfully appealed Pollack's ruling. "New York
judges should not be owning stock in financial houses, banks, Verizon.
These are the people who wind up in their courts."
The law states clearly that federal judges must recuse themselves from
cases involving parties in which they have any financial interest. But
no one judges the judges, who are appointed by the President to
$136,000-a-year jobs for life. They are supposed to monitor
themselves.*"It is a self-policing system and it is destined to break
down from time to time," said Steven Lubet, a law professor at
Northwestern University's Chicago campus.
Manhattan and Brooklyn federal courts are no exception. A review of
court records and financial disclosure forms found several sitting
judges with possible conflicts of interest. ....
J.A.I.L.- Judicial Accountability Initiative Law - www.jail4judges.org
JAIL is a unique addition to our form of gov't. heretofore unrealized.
JAIL is powerful! JAIL is dynamic! JAIL is America's ONLY hope!
JAIL is taking America like a wildfire! [email protected]
JAIL is making inroads into Congress for federal accountability!
E-Groups sign on at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jail4judges/join
Get involved at [email protected]
Donate offerings to J.A.I.L., P.O. Box 207, N. Hollywood, CA 91603
"Give me your wealth, and I will give you America"* - Ron Branson
*
"..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate,
tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." - Samuel
Adams
*
"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is
striking at the
root."************************
-- Henry David Thoreau*** <><

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
[...] "I can't understand why any judge sitting in New York would
own stock in any company likely to litigate in New York," said lawyer
Daniel Levitt, who successfully appealed [bad judge] Pollack's ruling. "New
York
judges should not be owning stock in financial houses, banks, Verizon.
These are the people who wind up in their courts."
The law states clearly that federal judges must recuse themselves from
cases involving parties in which they have any financial interest. But
no one judges the judges, who are appointed by the President to
$136,000-a-year jobs for life.
^^^^^^^

Bullllllllll ****tttttttt. They serve during good behavior. Look at your
Constitution, and some of them like Pollack should be hauled before the
Senate on a bill of impeachment.

Comment

<[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected] [...] "I can't understand why any judge sitting in New York would own stock in any company likely to litigate in New York," said lawyer Daniel Levitt, who successfully appealed [bad judge] Pollack's ruling. "New York judges should not be owning stock in financial houses, banks, Verizon. These are the people who wind up in their courts." The law states clearly that federal judges must recuse themselves from cases involving parties in which they have any financial interest. But no one judges the judges, who are appointed by the President to $136,000-a-year jobs for life. ^^^^^^^ Bullllllllll ****tttttttt. They serve during good behavior. Look at your Constitution, and some of them like Pollack should be hauled before the Senate on a bill of impeachment.

And the chances of *that* are slim and none. Thomas Jefferson called
impeachment a farce, and I have yet to see any evidence that he has been
ever proven wrong.

The LaborLawTalk.com forum is intended for informational use only and should not be relied upon and is not a substitute for legal advice. The information contained on LaborLawTalk.com are opinions and suggestions of members and is not a representation of the opinions of LaborLawTalk.com. LaborLawTalk.com does not warrant or vouch for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any postings or the qualifications of any person responding. Please consult a legal expert or seek the services of an attorney in your area for more accuracy on your specific situation. Please note that some of our forums also serve as mirrors to Usenet newsgroups. Many posts you see on our forums are made by newsgroup users who may not be members of LaborLawTalk.com